Introdução: o uso da sedação na rotina endoscópica tem sido empregado praticamente de maneira universal. O emprego de propofol parece se relacionar a exame mais confortável, com aumento da satisfação com o exame, pelo médico e pelo paciente. Entretanto, o uso do propofol está associado ao maior risco de sedação profunda e às complicações a ela associadas. Objetivo: comparar dois esquemas de sedação para a realização de endoscopia digestiva alta diagnóstica, grupo midazolam (midazolam e fentanil) com o grupo propofol (propofol e fentanil) quanto ao nível de sedação profunda e, como desfechos secundários, o grau de satisfação, o tempo de recuperação e a frequência de complicações entre os grupos. Método: foi realizado estudo experimental, prospectivo, randômico, cego com 200 pacientes, 100 no grupo midazolam e 100 no grupo propofol. Resultado: utilizando a escala OAA/S e o índice bispectral (BIS), respectivamente 11% e 7% dos pacientes do grupo midazolam e 25% e 19 % do grupo propofol apresentaram níveis de sedação profunda, sendo significativamente mais frequente neste último grupo. Houve boa correlação do nível de sedação da escala clínica OAA/S com o índice bispectral (BIS) para os dois grupos (k=0,63 para o grupo midazolam e k=0,71 para o grupo propofol). Quarenta e dois por cento dos pacientes do grupo propofol e 26% dos pacientes do grupo midazolam precisaram de oferta suplementar de oxigênio (p=0,025). O tempo médio de recuperação dos pacientes do grupo midazolam foi de 44,13 min e do grupo propofol foi de 28,82 min (p<0,001). O grau de satisfação dos pacientes foi semelhante entre os grupos e os médicos deram preferência ao uso da associação propofol/fentanil. Não se observaram complicações graves decorrentes da sedação em ambos os grupos. Conclusão: ambos os esquemas de sedação levam à sedação profunda. O grupo propofol utilizando o propofol e fentanil apresentou eventos de sedação profunda mais frequentemente. Por outro lado, os dois esquemas são seguros. Os pacientes do grupo propofol apresentaram tempo de indução da sedação, de recuperação e de liberação menores / Introduction: the use of sedation is almost universal for the practice of upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. The use of propofol seems to be associated with higher physician and patient satisfaction. However there is a higher risk of deep sedation and its related complication when propofol is used. Objective: compare the frequency of deep sedation events with two drug associations for the sedation in upper GI endoscopy. The OAA/S score and the bispectral index monitoring (BIS) were employed for the assessment of consciousness level. Secondarily we compared patient and physician satisfaction, recovery time and the complication rates between the two groups. Methods: two hundred patients sent for upper GI endoscopy were randomized in two groups: midazolam and propofol, each of them with 100 patients. Results: Deep sedation events occurred in 11% (OAA/S score) and 7% (BIS) in group midazolam and significantly more frequent in group propofol (25%- OAA/S score and 19% - BIS). There was a good agreement between the OAA/S score and the bispectral index (BIS) in both groups (k=0.63 and K=0.71 for groups midazolam and propofol, respectively). Forty two per cent of group propofol patients and 26% of group midazolam patients needed oxygen supplementation (p=0.025). The mean recovery time for groups midazolam and propofol patients were 44.13 min and 28.82 min, respectively (p<0.001). While patients were equally satisfied with both drug associations, physicians were more satisfied with the propofol/fentanyl association. We did not record any severe complications related with sedation. Conclusion: both drug associations are associated with deep sedation events. The propofol/fentanyl association causes deep sedation events more frequently when compared with midazolam/fentanyl association. Both associations are safe. The induction sedation, recovery and discharge times were shorter with propofol/fentanyl association

Magister Scientiae - MSc / The purpose of this research project was to assess the safety and efficacy of a combination of drugs for conscious sedation in patients undergoing office-based plastic and reconstructive surgery. A pilot study was done to determine the safety of the co-administration of the drugs used in the sedation technique. / South Africa

Introdução: o uso da sedação na rotina endoscópica tem sido empregado praticamente de maneira universal. O emprego de propofol parece se relacionar a exame mais confortável, com aumento da satisfação com o exame, pelo médico e pelo paciente. Entretanto, o uso do propofol está associado ao maior risco de sedação profunda e às complicações a ela associadas. Objetivo: comparar dois esquemas de sedação para a realização de endoscopia digestiva alta diagnóstica, grupo midazolam (midazolam e fentanil) com o grupo propofol (propofol e fentanil) quanto ao nível de sedação profunda e, como desfechos secundários, o grau de satisfação, o tempo de recuperação e a frequência de complicações entre os grupos. Método: foi realizado estudo experimental, prospectivo, randômico, cego com 200 pacientes, 100 no grupo midazolam e 100 no grupo propofol. Resultado: utilizando a escala OAA/S e o índice bispectral (BIS), respectivamente 11% e 7% dos pacientes do grupo midazolam e 25% e 19 % do grupo propofol apresentaram níveis de sedação profunda, sendo significativamente mais frequente neste último grupo. Houve boa correlação do nível de sedação da escala clínica OAA/S com o índice bispectral (BIS) para os dois grupos (k=0,63 para o grupo midazolam e k=0,71 para o grupo propofol). Quarenta e dois por cento dos pacientes do grupo propofol e 26% dos pacientes do grupo midazolam precisaram de oferta suplementar de oxigênio (p=0,025). O tempo médio de recuperação dos pacientes do grupo midazolam foi de 44,13 min e do grupo propofol foi de 28,82 min (p<0,001). O grau de satisfação dos pacientes foi semelhante entre os grupos e os médicos deram preferência ao uso da associação propofol/fentanil. Não se observaram complicações graves decorrentes da sedação em ambos os grupos. Conclusão: ambos os esquemas de sedação levam à sedação profunda. O grupo propofol utilizando o propofol e fentanil apresentou eventos de sedação profunda mais frequentemente. Por outro lado, os dois esquemas são seguros. Os pacientes do grupo propofol apresentaram tempo de indução da sedação, de recuperação e de liberação menores / Introduction: the use of sedation is almost universal for the practice of upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. The use of propofol seems to be associated with higher physician and patient satisfaction. However there is a higher risk of deep sedation and its related complication when propofol is used. Objective: compare the frequency of deep sedation events with two drug associations for the sedation in upper GI endoscopy. The OAA/S score and the bispectral index monitoring (BIS) were employed for the assessment of consciousness level. Secondarily we compared patient and physician satisfaction, recovery time and the complication rates between the two groups. Methods: two hundred patients sent for upper GI endoscopy were randomized in two groups: midazolam and propofol, each of them with 100 patients. Results: Deep sedation events occurred in 11% (OAA/S score) and 7% (BIS) in group midazolam and significantly more frequent in group propofol (25%- OAA/S score and 19% - BIS). There was a good agreement between the OAA/S score and the bispectral index (BIS) in both groups (k=0.63 and K=0.71 for groups midazolam and propofol, respectively). Forty two per cent of group propofol patients and 26% of group midazolam patients needed oxygen supplementation (p=0.025). The mean recovery time for groups midazolam and propofol patients were 44.13 min and 28.82 min, respectively (p<0.001). While patients were equally satisfied with both drug associations, physicians were more satisfied with the propofol/fentanyl association. We did not record any severe complications related with sedation. Conclusion: both drug associations are associated with deep sedation events. The propofol/fentanyl association causes deep sedation events more frequently when compared with midazolam/fentanyl association. Both associations are safe. The induction sedation, recovery and discharge times were shorter with propofol/fentanyl association

Introdução: Interrupção diária da sedação e sedação intermitente são efetivas na redução do tempo de ventilação mecânica. No entanto, a superioridade de uma em relação à outra não foi ainda determinada. Nosso objetivo foi comparar a interrupção diária da sedação e a sedação intermitente quanto à duração da ventilação mecânica em uma unidade de terapia intensiva (UTI) com baixa densidade de pessoal de enfermagem. Métodos: Pacientes adultos com expectativa de permanecerem por mais de 24h em ventilação mecânica foram randomizados, em um centro único, à interrupção diária da infusão de sedativos e opioides ou à sedação intermitente. Em ambos os casos, o objetivo era manter os pacientes em nível de SAS (Sedation Agitation Scale) 3 ou 4, ou seja, os pacientes deveriam estar calmos ou serem facilmente despertos com estímulo verbal ou leve sacudida. O desfecho primário foi número de dias livres da ventilação mecânica em 28 dias. Os desfechos secundários foram mortalidade na UTI e hospitalar, incidência de delirium, carga de trabalho da enfermagem, extubação acidental e stress psicológico seis meses após a alta da UTI. Resultados: Foram incluídos 60 pacientes. Não houve diferenças quanto ao número de dias livres em 28 dias entre interrupção diária da sedação e sedação intermitente (mediana: 24 vs. 25 dias, P = 0,160). Também não houve diferenças quanto à mortalidade na UTI (40 vs. 23,3%, P = 0,165) ou hospitalar (43,3 vs. 30%, P = 0,284), incidência de delirium (30 vs. 40%, p = 0,472), extubação acidental (3,3 vs. 6,7%, P = 0,514) e stress psicológico seis meses após a alta da UTI. A carga de trabalho de enfermagem não foi diferente entre os dois grupos, mas reduziu-se no quinto dia de internação na UTI em comparação com o primeiro dia [Nurse Activity Score (NAS) no grupo sedação intermitente foi 54 no dia 1vs. 39 no dia 5, P < 0.001; NAS no grupo interrupção diária da sedação foi 53 no dia 1 vs. 38 no dia 5, P < 0.001]. As dosagens de fentanil e midazolam por paciente foram maiores no grupo interrupção diária da sedação. O volume corrente foi maior no grupo sedação intermitente durante os primeiros cinco dias de internação na UTI. Conclusões: Não houve diferenças quanto ao número de dias livres de ventilação mecânica em 28 dias entre os grupos. Sedação intermitente associou-se a um menor uso de sedativos e opioides / Introduction: Daily sedative interruption and intermittent sedation are effective in abbreviating the time on mechanical ventilation. Whether one is superior to the other has not yet been determined. Our aim was to compare daily interruption and intermittent sedation during the mechanical ventilation period in a low nurse staffing intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: Adult patients expected to need mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours were randomly assigned, in a single center, either to daily interruption of continuous sedative and opioid infusion or to intermittent sedation. In both cases, our goal was to maintain a Sedation Agitation Scale (SAS) level of 3 or 4; that is patients should be calm, easily arousable or awakened with verbal stimuli or gentle shaking. Primary outcome was ventilator-free days in 28 days. Secondary outcomes were ICU and hospital mortality, incidence of delirium, nurse workload, self-extubation and psychological distress six months after ICU discharge. Results: A total of 60 patients were included. There were no differences in the ventilator-free days in 28 days between daily interruption and intermittent sedation (median: 24 versus 25 days, P = 0.160). There were also no differences in ICU mortality (40 versus 23.3%, P = 0.165), hospital mortality (43.3 versus 30%, P = 0.284), incidence of delirium (30 versus 40%, P = 0.472), self-extubation (3.3 versus 6.7%, P = 0.514), and psychological stress six months after ICU discharge. Also, the nurse workload was not different between groups, but it was reduced on day 5 compared to day 1 in both groups (Nurse Activity Score (NAS) in the intermittent sedation group was 54 on day 1versus 39 on day 5, P < 0.001; NAS in daily interruption group was 53 on day 1 versus 38 on day 5, P < 0.001). Fentanyl and midazolam total dosages per patient were higher in the daily interruption group. The tidal volume was higher in the intermittent sedation group during the first five days of ICU stay. Conclusions: There was no difference in the number of ventilator-free days in 28 days between both groups. Intermittent sedation was associated with lower sedative and opioid doses

This dissertation introduces a new problem in the delivery of healthcare, which could result in lower cost and a higher quality of medical care as compared to the current healthcare practice. In particular, a framework is developed for sedation and cardiopulmonary management for patients in the intensive care unit. A method is introduced to automatically detect pain and agitation in nonverbal patients, specifically in sedated patients in the intensive care unit, using their facial expressions. Furthermore, deterministic as well as probabilistic expert systems are developed to suggest the appropriate drug dose based on patient sedation level. This framework can be used to automatically control the level of sedation in the intensive care unit patients via a closed-loop control system. Specifically, video and other physiological variables of a patient can be constantly monitored by a computer and used as a feedback signal in a closed-loop control architecture. In addition, the expert system selects the appropriate drug dose based on the patient's sedation level. In clinical intensive care unit practice sedative/analgesic agents are titrated to achieve a specific level of sedation. The level of sedation is currently based on clinical scoring systems. In general, the goal of the clinician is to find the drug dose that maintains the patient at a sedation score corresponding to a moderately sedated state. This is typically done empirically, administering a drug dose that usually is in the effective range for most patients, observing the patient's response, and then adjusting the dose accordingly. However, the response of patients to any drug dose is a reflection of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of the drug and the specific patient. In this research, we use pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling to find an optimal drug dosing control policy to drive the patient to a desired sedation score.

Introdução: Interrupção diária da sedação e sedação intermitente são efetivas na redução do tempo de ventilação mecânica. No entanto, a superioridade de uma em relação à outra não foi ainda determinada. Nosso objetivo foi comparar a interrupção diária da sedação e a sedação intermitente quanto à duração da ventilação mecânica em uma unidade de terapia intensiva (UTI) com baixa densidade de pessoal de enfermagem. Métodos: Pacientes adultos com expectativa de permanecerem por mais de 24h em ventilação mecânica foram randomizados, em um centro único, à interrupção diária da infusão de sedativos e opioides ou à sedação intermitente. Em ambos os casos, o objetivo era manter os pacientes em nível de SAS (Sedation Agitation Scale) 3 ou 4, ou seja, os pacientes deveriam estar calmos ou serem facilmente despertos com estímulo verbal ou leve sacudida. O desfecho primário foi número de dias livres da ventilação mecânica em 28 dias. Os desfechos secundários foram mortalidade na UTI e hospitalar, incidência de delirium, carga de trabalho da enfermagem, extubação acidental e stress psicológico seis meses após a alta da UTI. Resultados: Foram incluídos 60 pacientes. Não houve diferenças quanto ao número de dias livres em 28 dias entre interrupção diária da sedação e sedação intermitente (mediana: 24 vs. 25 dias, P = 0,160). Também não houve diferenças quanto à mortalidade na UTI (40 vs. 23,3%, P = 0,165) ou hospitalar (43,3 vs. 30%, P = 0,284), incidência de delirium (30 vs. 40%, p = 0,472), extubação acidental (3,3 vs. 6,7%, P = 0,514) e stress psicológico seis meses após a alta da UTI. A carga de trabalho de enfermagem não foi diferente entre os dois grupos, mas reduziu-se no quinto dia de internação na UTI em comparação com o primeiro dia [Nurse Activity Score (NAS) no grupo sedação intermitente foi 54 no dia 1vs. 39 no dia 5, P < 0.001; NAS no grupo interrupção diária da sedação foi 53 no dia 1 vs. 38 no dia 5, P < 0.001]. As dosagens de fentanil e midazolam por paciente foram maiores no grupo interrupção diária da sedação. O volume corrente foi maior no grupo sedação intermitente durante os primeiros cinco dias de internação na UTI. Conclusões: Não houve diferenças quanto ao número de dias livres de ventilação mecânica em 28 dias entre os grupos. Sedação intermitente associou-se a um menor uso de sedativos e opioides / Introduction: Daily sedative interruption and intermittent sedation are effective in abbreviating the time on mechanical ventilation. Whether one is superior to the other has not yet been determined. Our aim was to compare daily interruption and intermittent sedation during the mechanical ventilation period in a low nurse staffing intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: Adult patients expected to need mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours were randomly assigned, in a single center, either to daily interruption of continuous sedative and opioid infusion or to intermittent sedation. In both cases, our goal was to maintain a Sedation Agitation Scale (SAS) level of 3 or 4; that is patients should be calm, easily arousable or awakened with verbal stimuli or gentle shaking. Primary outcome was ventilator-free days in 28 days. Secondary outcomes were ICU and hospital mortality, incidence of delirium, nurse workload, self-extubation and psychological distress six months after ICU discharge. Results: A total of 60 patients were included. There were no differences in the ventilator-free days in 28 days between daily interruption and intermittent sedation (median: 24 versus 25 days, P = 0.160). There were also no differences in ICU mortality (40 versus 23.3%, P = 0.165), hospital mortality (43.3 versus 30%, P = 0.284), incidence of delirium (30 versus 40%, P = 0.472), self-extubation (3.3 versus 6.7%, P = 0.514), and psychological stress six months after ICU discharge. Also, the nurse workload was not different between groups, but it was reduced on day 5 compared to day 1 in both groups (Nurse Activity Score (NAS) in the intermittent sedation group was 54 on day 1versus 39 on day 5, P < 0.001; NAS in daily interruption group was 53 on day 1 versus 38 on day 5, P < 0.001). Fentanyl and midazolam total dosages per patient were higher in the daily interruption group. The tidal volume was higher in the intermittent sedation group during the first five days of ICU stay. Conclusions: There was no difference in the number of ventilator-free days in 28 days between both groups. Intermittent sedation was associated with lower sedative and opioid doses

Cette thèse d’éthique médicale, située dans une approche interdisciplinaire et tentant de s’affranchir de tout préjugé personnel de la part de l’auteur, tend à apporter un éclairage, aussi objectif que possible, sur une question, jusqu’à présent, inexplorée : la communication sur la sédation continue, maintenue jusqu’au décès, dans les unités de soins palliatifs, en France et en Pologne. En premier lieu, une recherche bibliographique a été réalisée et les principales failles des publications existantes ont été mises en exergue dont deux en particulier : le flou terminologique et conceptuel autour de la notion de sédation dans le champ de la médecine palliative, et de la notion de représentation elle-même. Pour que l’objet de recherche soit correctement cerné, deux notions-clés – la notion de sédation continue, maintenue jusqu’au décès et la notion de représentation – ont été d’abord explicitées, puis articulées entre elles. En second lieu, une recherche qualitative fondée sur l’étude de cas multiples a été réalisée sur le terrain, c’est-à-dire dans différentes unités de soins palliatifs, en France et en Pologne. Deux méthodes qualitatives ont été adoptées : l’analyse de dossiers et les entretiens semi-directifs individuels. Ces derniers ont été réalisés auprès des principaux acteurs impliqués dans une situation de communication : les médecins prescripteurs, les infirmières et les proches des malades sédatés. Les malades n’ont pas été interrogés, mais leurs témoignages ont été recueillis via les entretiens avec les professionnels de santé et les proches. Quinze cas complets par pays, soit trente cas en tout, ont été inclus dans l’étude. Les données obtenues ont été analysées à l’aide d’outils linguistiques adaptés. Les résultats ont montré que les représentations de la « sédation continue, maintenue jusqu’au décès », faites par les professionnels de santé, avaient un impact sur la délivrance de l’information. Une certaine influence des contextes nationaux a été observée, dans la plupart des cas. En revanche, les souhaits des malades et de leurs proches, quant au contenu de l’information, étaient les mêmes dans les deux pays. Par ailleurs, ce n’était pas tant l’information stricto sensu qui comptait mais une présence bienveillante. Ce besoin de relation nous a amenés à nous interroger sur une certaine universalité de l’être souffrant, malgré ses particularités, d’où notre proposition d’une éthique de la présence à l’autre. Ne devrait-elle pas être intégrée dans le champ de la médecine palliative ou plutôt dans la médecine toute entière, voire dans nos vies de tous les jours ? / This thesis addresses an issue of medical ethics which has previously been investigated, that of communication concerning continuous sedation until death as practised in palliative care units in France and Poland. Using an interdisciplinary approach, free of any personal preconceptions by the author, it aims to provide an objective insight into the issue. A literature review is performed initially which highlights the main flaws in the existing publications of which there are two in particular: terminological and conceptual confusion around the idea of sedation in palliative medicine and its conceptual representation. In order to properly frame the object of research, two key concepts: continuous sedation until death and representation are first clarified and then linked together. Subsequently, a qualitative multiple-case field study is performed in a number of different palliative care units in France and Poland. Two qualitative methods are used: case analyses and individual semi-structured interviews with the main parties involved in the communication process - prescribing clinicians, nurses and the families and friends of sedated patients. Patients were not directly interviewed but their experiences were accounted for via the interviews with the carers and family members. Thirty completed case, fifteen per country, are included in the study. The data obtained are analysed using the appropriate linguistic tools. The results show that carers' representations of “continuous sedation until death” influence the delivery of information to patients. The national contexts are seen to exert a certain influence in most cases. However, with regard to the content of information, the wishes of patients and family members are the same in both countries. Moreover, it is less the information itself that counts as much as the caring way it is delivered. The emergence from this study of a needful wish to be cared for leads us to question whether, despite individual differences, there is not a universal dimension to the suffering being. This in turn prompts our suggestion of an ethical scope to the presence of the other. Should this not be at the root of palliative medicine and moreover throughout the entire field of medicine? And if that's the case, why not in our everyday lives ?

Bakgrund: Sedering används ofta som komplement till regional och lokal anestesi. Sedering kan ges av anestesipersonal (ACS) eller genom patientkontrollerad sedering (PCS). Denna litteraturöversikt syftar till att jämföra dessa metoder. Syfte: Att jämföra patientkontrollerad sedering med sedering given av anestesipersonal avseende skillnad i maximalt sederingsdjup, total läkemedelsdos och tid till utskrivning. Metod: Systematisk litteraturöversikt med narrativ syntes. Litteratursökning i databaserna Pubmed, CINAHL, Scopus och Embase. Det primära utfallet var maximalt sederingsdjup. Sekundära utfall var total läkemedelsdos, samt tid till utskrivning från uppvakningsavdelning. Resultat: 10 studier inkluderades i resultatet (totalt 717 patienter). Studierna hanterar olika ingrepp såsom koloskopier, bronkoskopier och ledplastik. Majoriteten av studierna visade signifikanta skillnader till PCS-gruppernas fördel, med ett ytligare sederingsdjup, en lägre total läkemedelsdos och en kortare tid till utskrivning från uppvakningsavdelning. Stor spridning sågs inom alla grupper gällande total läkemedelsdos. Diskussion/ slutsatser: Resultatet stöds av liknande studier. Ett ytligare sederingsdjup leder till mindre risk för biverkningar för patienten. Eftersom PCS återger ett visst självbestämmande till patienten, ger denne möjlighet att själv välja sederingsdjup i stunden, samt att patienten ges beslutet att tacka ja eller nej till PCS gör att denna sederingsmetod blir ett sätt att arbeta personcentrerat. Vidare forskning krävs, exempelvis större RCT och studier angående patienters upplevelser av PCS. Nyckelord: Patientkontrollerad sedering, sederingsdjup, läkemedelsdos, utskrivningstid, personcentrerad vård / Background: Sedation is often used as a supplement to regional and local anesthesia. Sedation can be given as anesthesia personnel-controlled sedation (ACS) or as patient-controlled sedation (PCS). This systematic review aims to compare these methods. Aim: To compare patient-controlled sedation with anesthesia personnel-controlled sedation regarding maximum depth of sedation, total drug dose and time to discharge. Methods: Systematic review with narrative synthesis. The research material was collected from Pubmed, CINAHL, Scopus and Embase. Primary outcome was maximum depth of sedation. Secondary outcomes were total drug dose and time to discharge from PACU (post anesthesia care unit). Result: 10 trials were included in the result (a total of 717 patients). The trials handle various procedures such as colonoscopies, bronchoscopies and arthroplasty. The majority of the trials showed significant differences in favour of PCS, with a lighter depth of sedation, a lower total drug dose and a shorter time to discharge from PACU. Regarding total drug dose, a large fluctuation was seen in all groups. Discussion/ conclusion: The result is supported by similar trials. A lighter depth of sedation reduces the risk of side effects for the patient. PCS is a way to practice person-centered care, when power is given back to the patient to freely choose the depth of sedation. The patient is also given the decision to say yes or no to PCS. Further research is required, for example larger RCT:s and studies regarding patients experiences of PCS. Keywords: Patient-controlled sedation, depth of sedation, drug dose, time to discharge, person-centered care

Bakgrund: Patientkontrollerad smärtlindring och patientkontrollerad sedering (PCA/PCS) är kliniskt sett säkra metoder för att leverera smärtlindring eller sedering till patienter utan direkt åtgärd från sjuksköterskor. Metoderna anses av sjuksköterskor vara metoder som stärker patienters autonomi, men riskerar att distansera sjuksköterskor från patienter. För att skapa ett bredare perspektiv på metoderna undersöks i detta arbete patienters upplevelser av PCA/PCS. Syfte; Syftet är att beskriva patienters upplevelse i samband med användning av patientkontrollerad smärtlindring och sedering (PCA/PCS). Metod: Integrativ litteraturöversikt baserad på 19 artiklar. Resultat: Två teman med tre respektive två subteman framkom från analysen. Det första temat var Möjligheter med PCA/PCS beskrivet av subteman Att ha färre biverkningar, Att ha ökad autonomi och Att vara bekväm med administreringsmetoden av läkemedel. Det andra temat var Utmaningar med PCA/PCS, beskrivet av subteman Att inte få individuella behov bemötta och Att känna minskad trygghet. Slutsats: Patienters upplevelser av PCA/PCS har varit generellt positiva, med goda möjligheter att öka tillfredställelsen med den vård som erbjuds. Resultatet visar att metoderna är användbara för att stärka patienters upplevelse av autonomi. Vidare påvisas att utmaningar som metoderna innebär kan motverkas av välinformerade patienter. / Background: Patient-controlled analgesia and patient-controlled sedation (PCA/PCS) are clinically safe methods for sedation and pain management for patients without direct intervention from nurses. The methods are viewed by nurses to be a way to strengthen patients' autonomy but poses a risk of distancing patients from nurses. To broaden the perspective on these methods, this paper studies patients' experiences of PCA/PCS. Aim: The aim of this paper is to describe the patients’ experience in relation with the use of patient-controlled analgesia and sedation (PCA/PCS). Method: Integrative review based on 19 articles. Result: Two themes emerged from the analysis. The first theme was Possibilities of PCA/PCS, described by the three subthemes To have fewer side effects, To have strengthened autonomy and To be comfortable the method of drug administration. The second theme was Challenges of PCS/PCS described by the two subthemes To not have individual needs met and To feel unsafe. Conclusion: Patients' experiences of PCA/PCS have been generally positive, with strong possibilities of increasing patients satisfaction with provided care. The result shows that the methods are useful for strengthening patients' autonomy. Additionally, eventual challenges that may occur while using these methods may be alleviated with well-informed patients.

Introduktion: I dag ska patienter som vårdas på intensivvårdsavdelning vara så lätt sederade som möjligt. Detta kan vid samtidig respiratorvård inge känslor av panik, rädsla och otrygghet. Det är därför av stor vikt att intensivvårdssjuksköterskor vet hur de ska skapa trygghet hos patienterna, då trygghetskänslan även reducerar känslorna av panik och rädsla. Syfte: Syftet med examensarbetet var att belysa hur intensivvårdssjuksköterskor skapar trygghet för lätt sederade patienter vårdade i respirator. Metod: En kvalitativ metod användes och data samlades in genom intervjuer med 14 intensivvårdssjuksköterskor på 3 olika sjukhus. Data bearbetades utifrån Elo och Kyngäs kvalitativa innehållsanalys. Huvudresultat: I resultatet framkom fyra huvudkategorier; Genom att finnas där, Genom upprepad och anpassad information, Genom en bra miljö och yttre resurser samt Genom individanpassad vård. Diskussion: Det framkom att intensivvårdssjuksköterskorna skapade trygghet genom att involvera patienterna och de anhöriga i vården genom en god kommunikation och information. Miljön spelade även en viktig roll i trygghetsskapandet genom att minska störande ljud och inte själva vara stressade. Att skapa trygghet för lätt sederade patienter som vårdas i respirator är viktigt, då trygga patienter kan släppas upp snabbare från sederingen och ändå uppleva välbefinnande. / Introduction: The aim of caring for today’s intensive care patient is to have the patient sedated so light as possible. This can induce a sense of panic, fear and insecurity for the patient, when cared for in a mechanical ventilation. It is therefore very important that the intensive care nurse has the ability to create a sense of security for the patient, thus reducing feelings of fear and panic. Aim: The aim of this study was to illustrate how the intensive care nurses creates a sense of security when caring for light sedated patients in mechanical ventilation. Method: A qualitative method was selected and data collected through interviews with 14 intensive care nurses at 3 different hospitals. The data was processed by using Elo and Kyngäs qualitative content analysis. Main Results: The result of the study presents with four main categories; Being there, Through repeating and adapting information, Through a good climate and outer resources as well as Through individually modified care. Conclusions: It showed that the intensive care nurses created a sense of security through involve the patients and their near ones in the care of the patient through good communication and information. The environment also played a critical role through minimizing distracting noise and not to appear stressed themselves. To create sense of security for light sedated patients in mechanical ventilation is important, as when the patients experience a sense of security they could be more quickly weaned of the sedation and yet still experience a sense of wellbeing.